Posted
by
kdawson
on Tuesday May 11, 2010 @12:30PM
from the run-but-you-can't-hide dept.

AlejoHausner writes "A team of archaeologists scanned the jungle of Belize with lidar. Although most of the reflections came from the jungle canopy, some light reflected off the ground surface. Using this, suddenly hidden pyramids, agricultural terraces, and ancient roads are revealed, at 6-inch resolution. The data allowed the archaeologists to bolster their theory that the ancient city of Caracol covered more than 70 square miles of urban sprawl and supported a population of over 115,000."

Seems like it might be useful for finding downed aircrafts and other missing objects....maybe even people?

Great thought, but the time to process lidar data takes a while. So planes and objects sure, but even the logistics to get this done takes time. Not sure about people, due to resolution over a vast area and again logistics.
The bare-earth relief (which strips away a degree of vegetation) lidar offers is incredible. Cartographers and geologist have only recently really taken advantage of the technology. But in time and $, these other uses could definitely be considered, especially when resolution and processing is more developed.

When working in or around a reflective medium, it is helpful to change the frequency to one that doesn't create so much noise. (RADAR became much more useful over water and in bad weather when the wavelength was shortened.) If something that made the canopy transparent but interesting objects below clear was an easy problem, it would have been done already, rather than relying heavily on computational analysis. However, nothing wrong with analytical techniques, which would still be very useful if a better t

"Today is day 4. We're flying the remainder of the target area and capturing data."

"Today is day 15. We're still processing the data."

"Today is day 30. We're still processing the data."

"Today is day 45. We've taken a helicopter to the most obvious structure with a nearby clearing. We confirmed it is a structure, but there are no sort of identifying marks on it. They likely have been erod

You mock, but the discoveries of megalithic structures over the past twenty years have called into question a lot of our assumptions about the earliest civilizations with technology. There are rock carvings being discovered in the Southern part of Africa that show very advanced understanding of astronomy, geography and time measurement that appear to be over twenty thousand years old which is much, much earlier than previously thought.

If we can ever get scientists to be able to really research the pyramids and nearby structures without the dictatorial control of the Egyptian government, there is reason to believe that there are references to sophisticated understanding of astronomy going back over fifty thousand years.

When I worked at the University of Chicago, I used to hang with people from the Oriental Institute. From them, I learned just how shaky a lot of the theories regarding Early Egyptian culture really are, including but not limited to how in the hell the pyramids were built. One of the foremost Egyptologists in the world once confirmed to me that the accepted theories are clearly ridiculous, that the notion that you can drag, or roll on logs, granite blocks weighing up to 100 tons for several miles, and then erasing every sign of the way in which they were moved, is just nonsense. Further, he'd like to know, how in the hell were they able to move those stones over 100 feet in the air to place them at the top of the pile?

This gentleman, now dead, explained that Egyptology specifically, and archeology generally, are so political that any theory or work done outside the mainstream is killed before it can even be peer-reviewed. This guy, a professor emeritus at the time, told me he'd had a 20 year correspondence with crypto-archeologist Graham Hancock and he was careful to tell me that though he disagreed with most of Hancock's assertions, that some of them deserved much closer consideration. And it's not only academic politics that have shaped our "consensus" regarding those civilizations. Religious and political forces have played an even greater role in making sure that the accepted history supports certain orthodoxies.

Atlantis? Well, probably not, but once you get past 50,000 years it's not at all impossible that there was a relatively advanced civilization on this planet that subsequently disappeared. Almost every native culture on Earth has legends about a "golden age" when a more advanced civilization existed, which then disappeared during a subsequent "dark age".

once you get past 50,000 years it's not at all impossible that there was a relatively advanced civilization on this planet that subsequently disappeared.

You don't even have to go back that far. The Minoan people of ancient Crete were well on the way to an industrial revolution of of their own that predated that of England by a couple of thousand years. If it wasn't for an inopportune volcanic eruption which completely wiped the Minoans out back around 1400 BCE, we might have had electronic computers by Roman times and those flying cars and jet packs we all wish for by now.

The Minoan people of ancient Crete were well on the way to an industrial revolution of of their own that predated that of England by a couple of thousand years. If it wasn't for an inopportune volcanic eruption which completely wiped the Minoans out back around 1400 BCE,

A volcano... or the horrific results of their experimentation with bio-engineering and the creation of a man-bull hybrid?!

I had a professor once that pretty effectively argued that Crete was Atlantis. I have forgot most of the arguments, but I believe one of them was that if you assumed a common translation error in numbers that Plato might have committed, then the eruption of Thera would coincide very well with the (corrected) time period of Atlantis's fall.

I had a professor once that pretty effectively argued that Crete was Atlantis

Yes, I've heard that too; in fact, one of the books I got my info on the Minoans from suggested the same. Also, that the eruption of Thera [wikipedia.org] was possibly the cause of the parting of the Reed Sea [wikipedia.org], a shallow marshy area of northern Egypt, which is incorrectly translated as "Red Sea" in the Bible.

he disagreed with most of Hancock's assertions, that some of them deserved much closer consideration. And it's not only academic politics that have shaped our "consensus" regarding those civilizations. Religious and political forces have played an even greater role in making sure that the accepted history supports certain orthodoxies.

Do you have any that you can share? Any specifics?

I would like to know more than just what "lies my teacher told me" kind of books show. History is important, and unfortunately are rewriting to suit the winners, usually with political/religion goals. I didn't think discovery was that harsh, although suspected it played a roll.

So please impart with us more than a simple "the truth is out there" . ..

It would be more accurate to say your history books are full of mistruths, but if you want examples, just pick nearly any thing from a high school history book... and then REALLY research it.

1) We're all told that Benedict Arnold was simply a traitor to the American Revolution... but not that he was mistreated prior to that. (note: I'm not drawing judgment, these are simply facts).2) We're all told that the "Americas" were sparsely populated by a few tens of thousands - not millions - of "natives". The "Trail of Tears" gets about 1/2 page coverage - scant compared to other 19th and 10th century genocides..3) General Custer died a hero, and was NOT a coward who engaged in genocidal killings of women and infants.4) Jesus was blonde, blue-eyed, and never took a wife

I'm just rattling off 4 I could think of inside of a few seconds.

(And to any perceived anti-US bias comments, it's untrue to suggest that. I happen to be most familiar with my own culture and therefore capable of poking holes in the lies it teaches. Every culture is guilty of this, but I can't be expected to have the same level of familiarity with those other cultures. Whatever, most people get it right?)

it's true that I was taught North America was all but unpopulated when Europeans first arrivedThis is true for most places in the Americas..Plague, inadvertently and inherently brought by very very early Spanish sailors, wiped out massive massive numbers of Native Americas. And it tended to travel faster than Europeans could colonize.The Pilgrims built their settlement on top of a Native American settlement. Why? Because a few years before the Pilgrims, plague had come through and killed off all the Indi

As an aside you'll notice the further north in the continents you go the better the slaves/natives were treated.

In Canada we treat our native peoples like shit, pretty much, despite some hopeful signs in northern British Columbia. There may be a tiny bit of truth to your observation, but natives were treated badly everywhere, to the extent possible, and by the time you get to Canada you're dealing with people who were eating very meat-heavy diets who were genetically low in alcohol dehydrogenase production, which meant that alcoholism finished in the 20th century what disease and cultural genocide started to do in t

Some interesting reading about these issues can be found in the books of Ralph Ellis. Another researcher who academics publicly label as a "kook" while begrudgingly accepting his conclusions in private.

Yes, but they also begrudgingly admit it's all a conspiracy due to him being behind on his Illuminati dues in private. (Hey wow, I can claim anything I want about what people do "in private" and point to the lack of published acknowledgment as proof! Of course, only a complete and utter fucking moron would believe me, since, of course, if they only do it in private, how the hell would I know?)

The Egyptians were experts in using water. Easy to level the base of the pyramids, just flood the whole area on a calm day, and mark the water level. Likewise, why drag/roll stones for miles when you can just build a canal and float them to the work site? With use temporary dykes and thousands of people to pump water up hill, you could practically float them into place and drop them. Of course, there would be no trace left of temporary systems put in place to move stones, be they canals or ramps, any more than there are traces of scaffolding around the great cathedrals.

I also find silly our clinging to the belief that there was absolutely no interaction between Egyptian and South American civilizations, despite growing evidence of "native" South American plants showing up in ancient Egypt. It seems like blatant Euro-centricism to assume that Europeans were the only ones capable of "discovering" new continents, especially since these continents were already inhabited by other peoples!

Uh, no. Dig a shallow pit where the base of the pyramid is going to go. Flood it. Mark the water level all around. Now you know exactly where your first course of stones needs to start to be perfectly level. Lower level stones could have been floated into place using dikes and locks, but yes, this is probably impractical for higher level stones. But water could be used to lift stones arbitrarily high by a simple method: build a dike on the opposite side of structure. Add heavy boat and fill with water. Run

A contemporary theory is that the stones are actually poured concrete that is molded in-place rather than carved and hoisted to position... makes quite a bit more sense and it just takes a lot of brute force to get it there, no fancy engineering really...

There have been several projects from different countries where engineers have tried to replicate the building of the pyramids using contemporaneous tools.

None have succeeded.

This little 'factoid' comes up often, and you know what it proves? Nothing other than some modern day engineers couldn't do it with techniques assumed to have been used. It doesn't prove that someone with an entire generational line of experience behind them in building ancient structures couldn't do it.

Nothing other than some modern day engineers couldn't do it with techniques assumed to have been used.

Yeah, it's pretty much like giving a modern computer scientist a quill, ink and parchment and asking them to work out Newtonian physics from scratch. Why anyone would expect someone with an utterly unrelated skill-set that is tuned up for the modern world to be able to replicate what ancient engineers did is beyond me.

The only thing stupider is when archeologists try to do the same thing: people who have clearly never built anything with their hands in their lives trying to intuit the optimal behaviour of

With use temporary dykes and thousands of people to pump water up hill,

College towns tend to have good beer, which I gather was very important to the Egyptian people and the pyramid laborers in particular, but otherwise I fail to see how LUGs are going to help us here. And I don't mean Linux Users Groups.

he said we shouldn't be certain "there was absolutely no interaction between Egyptian and South American civilizations".

If I dig through old Smithsonian Magazines I've got in the basement, I'll find an article about Hebrew scrolls found under Native American burial mounds dating more than a thousand years before Columbus.

If I dig through old Smithsonian Magazines I've got in the basement, I'll find an article about Hebrew scrolls found under Native American burial mounds dating more than a thousand years before Columbus.

I also find silly our clinging to the belief that there was absolutely no interaction between Egyptian and South American civilizations

Why?

The level of technological exchange you describe would have required regular communication. Given that the ships of the time could not even cross the Mediterranean safely this is very unlikely. It is not a stretch to think that one Ancient Egyptian or Greek may have crossed the Atlantic (with no understanding of global currents, this would have taken months) but not

Theres also evidence of Ramps around a few pyramids, (though not all, and none of the great ones of Giza I believe).

I think he might have been trolling a bit, their brick wasn't just sand and water, it was a carful mixture, including wheat. A lot of preparation went into preparing the stones, so that they were so strong, which is why they are still standing to this day. Also, the way everything is assembled brick by brick, you'd wonder why the base wouldn't be one giant piece, using his theory.

Also, the way everything is assembled brick by brick, you'd wonder why the base wouldn't be one giant piece, using his theory.

Not if you'd ever built anything big out of concrete, you wouldn't.

This is the problem with this kind of speculation: it is inevitably done by people who think they can see from their armchair how far more intelligent people[*] a few thousand years ago who were heirs to a deep and rich tradition of building techniques might have done things.

[*] The human population has grown by a factor of ten in the past 200 years, indicating selective pressures have dropped to essentially zero. If intelligence is herita

> Almost every native culture on Earth has legends about a "golden age" when a more advanced civilization existed, which then disappeared during a subsequent "dark age".

This idea appeared and appears every time after the war, specially in conquests with the resulting establishment of an oppressive regime. With time, it becomes part of the "legendary history" and conforms the roots of many independence movements and nationalisms.

There are rock carvings being discovered in the Southern part of Africa that show very advanced understanding of astronomy, geography and time measurement that appear to be over twenty thousand years old which is much, much earlier than previously thought.

[[citation needed]] An academic one showing how they determined without question that they had 'advanced' knowledge and discussing how the carving were dated. Anything less gets you filed with von Däniken and Art Bell.

Never mind technology, look at behaviour. Anything we don't understand is at best disregarded as "ritual" and at worst some elaborate fantasy is concocted that we don't have, nor could possibly hope to obtain, any evidence to support. (Not that I can be bothered to put in some evidence to support this argument, but this is/. after all).

I have problem with people making statements about how the pyramids could not be built with the technology available. So called crop circle experts said there was no way humans could be behind crop circles, until they were shown video of two retired guys and a wood plank in fact doing it. People used to talk about how it was scientifically impossible for a bumble bee to fly, but yet it does.

I think some people think too highly of their ability to figure things out, and they don't give other people enough credit for their ingenuity.

It all depends on who you call an expert. A scientifically renown professor doesn't really compare to a "crop circle expert"... Also nobody ever said that bumbebees can't fly, more that they hadn't figured out how.

This tale by Robert Schoch [dailygrail.com] is very revealing about the kind of resistance actual science gets from hidebound Egypt 'scholars'. (And a bit more about Hancock)

In the past year I've read enough new discoveries to suspect that a major paradigm shift about human history is building. How those big rocks got moved around is one of the more important pieces in the puzzle.

What's most impressive to me is how quickly they got the results. It only took a couple days of actual data gathering then a few weeks of lab processing. Last I heard about anything similar (using satellite images, IIRC) it took months to get results.

The NYT article was actually pretty good, but for those who want a bit more 'meat on the bone', here's the 2009 research project report:http://caracol.cos.ucf.edu/reports/2009.php [ucf.edu]There are some nice examples of the LIDAR images at the end of the page in the Figures section.

I was there in November and they have done a really good job there leaving some of the city as it exists today overtaken by the jungle and some restored to show how the Maya lived in the cities. You would have no idea the mounds and hills of the jungle are pyramids and structures. The people there say you can't buy land without diggin up a Maya house in your backyard. Today in Belize there are around 300,000 people in the whole country, versus estimations before the Maya collapse of a couple million. For pe

So we have found a large, ancient city with a large population. No good cable television in play explains it all. They had nothing to do but reproduce and without good sewer systems living a few steps away from your neighbors keeps the stink down a bit.

You just know that ~5000 years ago, some Mayan committee somewhere was designing this, and someone said "hey, what happens after year 5335?" and the answer was "who cares? by the time that rolls around, we'll be using something completely different."

It's just like Y2K, except there is nobody around now to fix their code.